From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <58c9a09539806ad0e5d6c0b07b3c7c89@plan9.escet.urjc.es> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: advantages of limbo From: Fco.J.Ballesteros In-Reply-To: <200403020708.i22787H3071038@adat.davidashen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-wnhsuxmevnxalosrzknrqrlrqq" Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:14:33 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0a3e3692-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-wnhsuxmevnxalosrzknrqrlrqq Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You did for a real program? Or for a simple example? I started to feel the difference only after doing my first real limbo program. But just to tell you what I mean, I feel that limbo lacks those features that make Java a complex laguage, yet it retains those that make it easy to reuse code. That's arguable, of course. --upas-wnhsuxmevnxalosrzknrqrlrqq Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by aquamar; Tue Mar 2 08:11:29 MET 2004 Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id EC08819C7D; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 02:11:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.4.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 6DD8C19C2B; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 02:11:10 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id CB1AC19C2B; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 02:10:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from adat.davidashen.net (unknown [217.113.20.242]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 6782419BEE for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 02:10:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from adat.davidashen.net (localhost.davidashen.net [127.0.0.1]) by adat.davidashen.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i22787ki071039 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 11:08:07 +0400 (AMT) (envelope-from dvd@adat.davidashen.net) Received: (from dvd@localhost) by adat.davidashen.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit) id i22787H3071038 for 9fans@cse.psu.edu; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 11:08:07 +0400 (AMT) From: David Tolpin Message-Id: <200403020708.i22787H3071038@adat.davidashen.net> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: advantages of limbo In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 11:08:07 +0400 (AMT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on psuvax1.cse.psu.edu X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: > > are there any other advantages of limbo over Java? > > Sure, the language. > Just try to write a program in both and compare. I did. Am I missing something? How closures are expressed in limbo? --upas-wnhsuxmevnxalosrzknrqrlrqq--